AIM

MSN

Website URL

ICQ

Yahoo

Jabber

Skype

Location

Interests

RPG Biography

Current games

Location

Blurb

So an idea for my current game is in its fetal stages inside my head. I was inspired by another thread on the forums about a skill list and I thought about the following:
How to define a skill, i.e. how broad or narrow is its reach?
How to avoid derivative skill discrepancies, e.g. where someone who is knowledgeable in physics isn't knowledgeable in math because they didn't put points in that?
I know BRP has symbiotic skills, where you can add 1/5 of a related skill to your skill roll, but that doesn't solve the first problem. Some skills are super broad like "Athletics" and some are super narrow like Craft (blacksmithing). Due to the variance in scope, a point put into Athletics is more valuable than a point put into Craft (blacksmithing).
So I went to search out what other systems do, but I haven't found one that strikes the right balance of realism and playability for me. So I started thinking about what I'm calling "organic skill trees".
The idea is that all skills begin with a player attempting some action. If the referee and player agree that it's an action any member of the characters species should be able to do without any special training they can use characteristic or "root skill". A root skill is simply two characteristics that fits with the desired action. For example, if a player wants to climb a tree he could use several different characteristics. He could say he uses his intelligence to plan a carefully selected route up the tree and uses his strength to pull him up, or maybe he uses his dexterity to jump between branches and intelligence to know which ones can support his weight. As long as the referee and the player both agree to the reason of this choice it would work. It also creates interesting variants in game description. It would also be more realistic because a character would tend to lean on their strongest characteristics to complete actions. The skill level in this case would simply be the combine characteristic score, usually between 20-30% for the average adventuring human.
But suppose the player expects to be climbing a lot. In this case, they can choose to specialize. To make a skill, they take the verb of what they were doing and that's the skill name. In my example of climbing a tree, the verb is "climb". Specialized skill would be limited to skill levels of root skill x 2, putting a cap at somewhere between 40-60%. If they want to be even better they could further specialize by adding a noun, eg "trees". Specializing again would raise the skill level limit 3 x the root skill, putting the cap somewhere between 60-90% for the average adventuring human. You could continue to specialize, unlocking higher and higher skill caps by adding more nouns. So the characters skill list might look like this at this point:
- Climb (STR+INT): 15%
- Climb (trees): 40%
- Climb (oak trees): 41%
More details on how I'm envisioning this working:
Specialized skills have a base score equal to the previous specialization, e.g. if you specialize in Climb (trees) when your Climb skill is at 15%, Climb (trees) starts at 15%.
Skill checks are still based on which skill you used, e.g. if you choose to use Climb you get a skill check in Climb, if you choose to use Climb (oak trees) you get a skill check in Climb (oak Trees)
Acquiring a new specialization requires a teacher or research, i.e money and time
There are a limited number of skill slots, tentatively 20. A player could choose to be able to have a few really high skill levels, e.g. Climb (oak trees), which is specialized 3 times (climb+oak+tree), is capped at 4 x root skill, putting the cap somewhere between 80-120% for the average adventuring human. Or they could choose to have lots of more generic skills, with limited growth potential.
Logic would naturally limit how far you could specialize, but in the end it will be down to the agreement between the ref and the player
Actions that couldn't be done without training, e.g. couldn't be attempted with just a root skill (i.e just the attribute scores), but the base skill level once trained or researched would still be based on 2 attributes
Certain actions might require multiple specializations to attempt, e.g. in my setting you have to learn a school of magic, before learning a specific magic spell so someone with the ability to magically heal might have to have
Cast Spells (INT+WILL): 21%
Cast Holy Spells: 24%
Cast Holy Spells (Heal): 32%
Combat Example:
Attack (STR+DEX): 25%
Attack (Spear): 43%
Attack (Spear - Halberd): 78%

So I missed another deadline of my own making, but I am working on the ever of Independence Day on Skaerune'. Recently I have been watching some RPG review videos (and enjoying them) and I realize the current trend is even more away from crunch in games than I thought. It did not bother me before: I mean for Skaerune' and Q21 to be a bit on the crunchy side. Yet still I had a frantic moment where I went through and was mentally cutting it up into pieces and wondering how I am going to keep my minor evolution. Then I went through the char sheet, made some minor tweaks and calmed myself the hell down. THIS is the game I want to make, publish, support, and sell. All I can do is sell it on its merits and hope plenty of people enjoy it.
Crisis averted, now I get back to work.

The holidays did renew the energies a bit, for a great many things including the game designs. However, I am in a portion of the Quick Start guide which is dry and a little bleh. I know how the game works why do others need to know! lol So I am reducing the Skaerune time on a given day and devoting it to fun vanity designs or campaigns etc.. I know once I get over this hump it will pick up again. Also, it would be good to actually play a bit as I GM and design more than I play. Playing would definitely help alleviate some fatigue.
I did figure out recently how many spells will be in the SkQSG. It is a good selection I think, but I may put out the list to see what others think. Same with beasts. It will be a small list to give folks a taste of the more unique Skaerune' monsters.

We have been trying to create the Perfect RPG for over forty years now. Through new ideas, changing needs and expectations, and a socio-technological boom that allows many of us to jump into that pursuit, game designers in corporate offices, home work places, and nerdy basements have been seeking that ONE system to rule them all (apologies. to Professor Tolkien). We have never found that system and likely never will, but that won't keep various people from trying. Including myself.
People change and people want things their own way and to leave their own mark upon legacies. It isn't a betrayal and there isn't anything wrong with it. Admittedly some handle it better than others, but overall we feel threatened by change almost as a knee jerk or allergic reaction. There is nothing logical to our reaction, but there is a great deal of emotion. I think that is fine but it makes for grumpy customers from time to time.....
Obviously I am speaking about the recent RQ6/RQNext revelations. Some folks are elated and some are angry and some are passive aggressive and I get it, I really do. It can be exasperating because to the player these are games and settings we are passionate about. Well us designers are passionate to. No one does this to get rich but if you are in some kind of business, you need to do smart things to make money. Business vs. Art.
So stay positive. This too shall pass.

So I have been playing with formatting and working on individual sections as I have pieces of them in place. I re formatted the bestiary and I like the new format, but it still looks like one entry per page. I pondered that a bit but decided this was my game and no player I have ever heard has said "there are too many entries in the monster section", at least as long as everything else is good too. I did notice that so far the creatures tend towards the dangerous side and tonight's beastie, the Cormoran Giant, is no exception.
So I am not quite done with them, but I told myself I had 10... no 15 more minutes of working on this before hitting the sheets (since it is 0h Cr4p 41 here). That was 40 minutes ago. I decided to spend a little time on the first small adventure to go into the Quickstart. Its called Delivery to the Sea and it is part 1 of 3. I think the best part of it was that I am writing an adventure for my own game. Not the design of someone else, which is still a great feeling btw, but for my set of rules however quirky and descended from other rule sets it is. I feel pretty good about that. It will also introduce both Salt Island and the Rakshasa / Glorious Empire in a small but hopefully powerful way.

My expectations for Skaerune' were that it would likely be third in line of the games I was working on. When I came here and really started getting into the site, I thought it might move up to #2. Well, now it's number one on my list and no regrets. The game is falling into place nicely and I feel like I have a good handle on it. I have made templates for myself. The layout is under way and looking good. Once I have a version people can look over, I have a good feeling about it. I am also keeping more of the OpenQuest 2 SRD than I imagined, which is as testament to that game and to Newt on designing a great version of d100.
So now I think I need a stuffed Rakshasa to sit on my office (i.e. desk) and demand I work harder, as stuffed mythological characters are want to do.